For anyone wondering, here's a couple of vids that sever as a visual aide. Neither one was jammed with the same sort of mud/gunk/sludge like mine was, but both the same general failures.
Why? Because I gots lots of them. They were "gifts"........so to speak. And they've worked well for me since they first came out........and were subsequently "gifted".
I own Glocks, which are apparently unsafe as well. So, I am obviously not to be taken seriously. I carry unsafe guns in unsafe holsters. I'm a veritable time bomb of catastrophe! Stand clear!!!!!!
:fan:
"To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
Safety system offers a manual safety lever while retaining all 3 internal Glock safeties. Parts are chrome-plated stainless steel with a black matte finish. Frame modification and gunsmith installation will be required.
Technical Information
Notes:
Ergonomically designed and located
Positive engagement and disengagement
With manual safety engaged, all three Glock passive safeties are locked in place
Pistol can be loaded and unloaded with manual safety engaged, thus diminishing the chance of an unintentional discharge
Long-wearing Stainless Steel, hard chrome plated parts with matte black tactical finish
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I am more than willing to have an "Honest Discussion on Glock Pistols" if somebody (anybody) on this forum is "honest enough" (able) to prove this statement................
"Fact is they ARE involved in a larger amount of "Boo Boos" than any other pistol."
.................so we can actually have an honest and informed discussion.
They are and using the supposition because of their vast numbers in use you already have that answer. Obviously, so many are being used (65% of US Law Enforcement) it would make sense about a 2/3 majority of an unknown amount of AD/ND would be with a Glock.
I don't disagree with that assumption. However I do think/believe/have a gut feeling that Glocks require special handling procedures/extra precautions other makes of semi-autos do not.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
It's impossible to have an "honest discussion" if you're going on supposition, gut feeling, what seems to be, and precious few facts. It all becomes a hypothetical argument at that point, and potentially not a very good one at that.
It's impossible to have an "honest discussion" if you're going on supposition, gut feeling, what seems to be, and precious few facts. It all becomes a hypothetical argument at that point, and potentially not a very good one at that.
Wait a minute, almost all the threads on this forum are not supported by "Facts' just what members experience and see, their likes and dislikes and personal perceptions. Since when does anything posted on the forum on any topic have to proven with statistics.
I was honest and admitted I don't have any solid data/facts/numbers beyond what I read and see on this and other forums. Therefore I'm totally wrong when I say Glocks are more prone to AD/NDs than other makes of pistols?
I wanted others members honest opinions on Glocks because I do see a lot of AD/ND reported in the news and it so happens the majority are with Glocks. I wanna know why and get input from others on here how they feel about Glocks.
I fired a compact Glock 9mm last weekend and the owner told me he carries it with an unloaded chamber because he doesn't feel comfortable carrying it "Loaded" and will sacrifice the time he will need to rack the slide if he needs to use it. He has been around guns a long time and I don't take his opinion lightly. It was his personal choice, not mine or anything I said to him.
I still say special precautions are needed with Glocks and for whatever reason folks seem to forget common good sense gun handling safety precautions with them. They work as advertised and there would be no AD/NDs if they followed safety steps 100%, but they don't and I want to know why. What is it about a Glock they seem to get a brain fart about they ordinarily wouldn't with other makes?
Is it because they are internally "Cocked" and they can't see it? Is it because they somehow lend themselves to being fired when a foreign object is caught in the trigger guard and the trigger is tugged/pulled slightly rearward, when they load or unload one or when they un-holster or re-holster one?
I do think I'm on to something here.
I'll be sure to post any pertinent data I can find (when and if it is ever available) on here that supports my theory or disproves it entirely.
In the meantime I appreciate all the input from all of you and am looking forward to hear from those who haven't expressed their opinions/experiences yet. Thanks in advance.
Besides I ain't French and I ain't surrendering. :tooth:
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I just reread my first post in this thread and I don't see what all the fuss is about. Please go back and do the same and I think it may clarify things somewhat.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I think given the fact there are so many Glocks with safe action triggers (as well as copies of said trigger system), if they were so dangerous, there would be lots of data out there supporting that "fact". There doesn't seem to be. I suggest reading Americas Gun by Paul Barnett. It discusses Glocks triggers quite a bit.
"He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
BC, your friend should get another pistol, another holster, or quit listening to unfounded rumors. I remember a certain 1911 holster that was made to carry an empty chamber...it let you rack the slide while the pistol was in the holster. A Glock isn't cocked until you pull the trigger. That's where the 5 pounds or so of trigger pull comes in, it moves the hammer to the striking position.
I'm not trying to convert anyone, but I would like to see some common sense in this argument. I went to Glock Armorer's school, have taken down Glocks to pre-assembly condition, and can assure you they won't go off until someone pulls the trigger.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
BC, your friend should get another pistol, another holster, or quit listening to unfounded rumors. I remember a certain 1911 holster that was made to carry an empty chamber...it let you rack the slide while the pistol was in the holster. A Glock isn't cocked until you pull the trigger. That's where the 5 pounds or so of trigger pull comes in, it moves the hammer to the striking position.
I'm not trying to convert anyone, but I would like to see some common sense in this argument. I went to Glock Armorer's school, have taken down Glocks to pre-assembly condition, and can assure you they won't go off until someone pulls the trigger.
Gene here I quote myself from my FIRST post in this thread:
"Those who own Glocks on here don't seem to have or had any issues with them. I know carrying one does take some understanding of how they function and what not to do because they can and will go BANG when a round is chambered and the TRIGGER is PULLED as advertised."
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I think given the fact there are so many Glocks with safe action triggers (as well as copies of said trigger system), if they were so dangerous, there would be lots of data out there supporting that "fact". There doesn't seem to be. I suggest reading Americas Gun by Paul Barnett. It discusses Glocks triggers quite a bit.
I think maybe like Army Jeeps I used to drive you had to be careful and fully understand how they operate. They would flip over because the center of gravity if you yanked the steering to hard for a sharp turn, but were capable of of going on forever if knew how too properly drive one. I did for years with no problems, but saw many rolled over when the operator got careless.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I am more than willing to have an "Honest Discussion on Glock Pistols" if somebody (anybody) on this forum is "honest enough" (able) to prove this statement................
"Fact is they ARE involved in a larger amount of "Boo Boos" than any other pistol."
.................so we can actually have an honest and informed discussion.
This has been said elsewhere - possibly even in this thread - I'm too strung out right now from dealing with a power outage to check. . .
Glock has something like 70% of the law enforcement market in the U.S., and they have a pretty substantial chunk of the the LE and military market worldwide. This equates to some millions of individuals who were issued a Glock, and potentially did zero research on their own to learn about the weapon. Everything they got on the gun was provided by their service. A percentage of those individuals will have no personal interest in the gun - it is simply part of their issued equipment. This level of apathy can be anywhere from "Well, it's a PITA, but I'd probably better learn THIS stuff because people really CAN get hurt here" to "Well, I guess I'd better learn this stuff or I'll get written up" to "Let them write me up. I'm a public employee with affirmative action immunity. It'll take more than that to make me lose my job and bennies"
To make this a fair discussion we've got to look at the following:
Number of N.D.s from pistols that are agency-issued equipment. The guy carrying a personal HK in a Glock agency, or for that matter, a personal Glock in an HK agency needs to be looked at separately, as they are most likely NOT in the ranks of the apathetic **** who probably shouldn't be packing in the first place.
Number of N.D.s per number of guns in the field - there is the possibility that there are more of them with Glocks simply because there are more Glocks out there. If 70% of the guns out there are Glocks, they need to be having more than 70% of the N.D.'s for this argument to be valid.
Look for a correlation between number of N.D.s, type of ISSUED weapon, and amount of training provided.
I'm not saying they should be pulled off the market or even that modifications should be made like an aftermarket safety (that should be a personal choice) or scum-sucking lawyers outta be able to win a lawsuit against Glock (never have to date).
The only lawsuit I'm aware of is in CA when a cop was paralyzed. He left his Glock in the backseat of a car and his 3 years son picked it up and shot him with it. He is now trying to blame Glock for his irresponsibility of leaving a loaded firearm in a child reach. No brainier to me he should lose the case. I found it on Police One or some similar sounding site.
"LOS ANGELES — A California appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit against gun maker Glock Inc. by a police officer paralyzed after his 3-year-old son accidentally shot him.
A Los Angeles judge dismissed a suit brought two years ago by Enrique Chavez, who claimed his service pistol, a Glock 21 handgun, had a light trigger pull and lacked a grip safety, an attached device that requires deactivation before firing.
The judge said the Los Angeles Police Department had reviewed the gun's design, including the force required to pull the trigger, and concluded its advantages outweighed any risks, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Wednesday.
The California Second Court of Appeal said Tuesday a jury could conclude a grip safety strong enough to withstand a 3 year-old's grasp "would minimize the risk of accidental discharge without undermining performance," and in a 3-0 ruling, allowed the case to continue."
The comments (below the article) on that site are good and blame the cop, not the Glock.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Good thoughtful post Bigslug, as usual. I read 65% of US LEOs are issued a Glock.
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I will not condemn the Glock out of hand - for those who are perfect, never make mistakes, never forget or overlook anything, or are constantly attended by their guardian angel, a Glock is a good choice. For the rest of us, the combination of mechanical levers and visual cues serves to enhance safe gun handling, and peace of mind when carrying.
As I say, different design philosophies. You regard a simple gun like a Glock as equivalent to running with scissors and that's fine. I regard using the more complex guns as trying to drive while simultaneously texting, eating breakfast, drinking coffee, and, in the case of Buffy and Zorba, putting on makeup. A lot of the **** I mentioned in my first post go into total vapor lock when you give them multiple controls. Face it - some people just can't drive a stick shift.
Ponder for a moment the traditional DA/SA autoloader - Sigs, pre-M&P Smith's, Beretta M9's, most HK USP variants. Yes, they have a heavy first trigger pull and a decocker or safety that gets you back to that point. The critical difference I see between these guns and the Glock is that you have to REMEMBER to engage those devices before you put the gun away in a cocked and unlocked condition. With the Glock, all you have to do is LET GO OF THE GUN.
" Baby, do you understand me now?
Sometimes I feel a little mad.
But don't you know that no one alive can always be an angel?
When things go wrong, I seem to be bad.
(group unison) But I'm just a soul whose intentions are good:
(just Burdon) Oh Lord! Please don't let me be misunderstood"
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Ohhhh, I've gots me some insights. Some came at the sacrifice of some pre-conceived notions that needed to date the heartless beeyotch of reality.
I basically provide three types of handgun training at work; anything from introductory to ongoing on Glocks for the rank and file, introduction to 1911's for SWAT newbies (who are typically pretty locked on with the gun stuff), and helpful pointers to those who decide to carry something other than the issued Glock (who are also typically pretty locked on with the gun stuff).
Thrown in with all of that, I get to run shotgun and rifle training, service weapons, order ammo, keep records, etc... Short version, there is an awful lot of the job and only a few of us trainer types to do it. My nightmare scenario would be a switch back to a DA/SA system with all those gadgets that Horselips is enamored of. There would be little change in my workload with regards to teaching the top 10-15%% - the warriors who are enthusiastically motivated to learn their equipment - but the amount of time and effort that would be required to develop and maintain safety and proficiency for the rest would be staggering. Then we get into the additional cost of ammo this would require. The taxpayers wouldn't like it, and my hair is in a race to be either all gray or all gone as it is.
One example I occasionally throw out is to equate all firearms with rattlesnakes. Just like guns, rattlesnakes are useful things to have around for keeping vermin in check. I personally have no problem being in the vicinity of a rattlesnake, BUT I AM DAMNED ATTENTIVE TO THE FACT THAT THE RATTLESNAKE IS THERE. People "get bit" when they forget they are dealing with a rattlesnake, and it makes little difference what species of rattler (or brand of gun) it is.
Glocks appear to be high-capacity revolvers designed to serve the lowest common denominator shooter- - - - -"professionals" who qualify once a year and carry the things as another accessory on their duty belts hoping none of it ever needs to be used. The guns perform well in that capacity- - - -as tools- - - -butt-ugly but effective tools when used as they are designed. They've got all the aesthetic appeal of a framing hammer, a skilsaw, or a pipe wrench.
Sort of like the AR-15, or the "sniper" bolt actions, Glocks are the fat, ugly chicks of the shooting world. Useful, but not necessarily something you brag to your friends about.
:vomit:
Jerry
Glocks appear to be high-capacity revolvers designed to serve the lowest common denominator shooter- - - - -"professionals" who qualify once a year and carry the things as another accessory on their duty belts hoping none of it ever needs to be used. The guns perform well in that capacity- - - -as tools- - - -butt-ugly but effective tools when used as they are designed. They've got all the aesthetic appeal of a framing hammer, a skilsaw, or a pipe wrench.
Sort of like the AR-15, or the "sniper" bolt actions, Glocks are the fat, ugly chicks of the shooting world. Useful, but not necessarily something you brag to your friends about.
:vomit:
Jerry
And every gun toting Joe Shmoe, too, according to "civilian" Glock sales too. They just stand still and shoot at paper with cartoon zombies on them all day with poor habits and no formal training...not even once a year. Gimme a break...
Glocks are designed for simplicity of function to reduce the action necessary to make the gun ready for business. It's your own damn fault if you don't train with it appropriately!
“There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
Wait a minute, almost all the threads on this forum are not supported by "Facts' just what members experience and see, their likes and dislikes and personal perceptions. Since when does anything posted on the forum on any topic have to proven with statistics.
I was honest and admitted I don't have any solid data/facts/numbers beyond what I read and see on this and other forums. Therefore I'm totally wrong when I say Glocks are more prone to AD/NDs than other makes of pistols?
I wanted others members honest opinions on Glocks because I do see a lot of AD/ND reported in the news and it so happens the majority are with Glocks. I wanna know why and get input from others on here how they feel about Glocks.
I fired a compact Glock 9mm last weekend and the owner told me he carries it with an unloaded chamber because he doesn't feel comfortable carrying it "Loaded" and will sacrifice the time he will need to rack the slide if he needs to use it. He has been around guns a long time and I don't take his opinion lightly. It was his personal choice, not mine or anything I said to him.
I still say special precautions are needed with Glocks and for whatever reason folks seem to forget common good sense gun handling safety precautions with them. They work as advertised and there would be no AD/NDs if they followed safety steps 100%, but they don't and I want to know why. What is it about a Glock they seem to get a brain fart about they ordinarily wouldn't with other makes?
Is it because they are internally "Cocked" and they can't see it? Is it because they somehow lend themselves to being fired when a foreign object is caught in the trigger guard and the trigger is tugged/pulled slightly rearward, when they load or unload one or when they un-holster or re-holster one?
I do think I'm on to something here.
I'll be sure to post any pertinent data I can find (when and if it is ever available) on here that supports my theory or disproves it entirely.
In the meantime I appreciate all the input from all of you and am looking forward to hear from those who haven't expressed their opinions/experiences yet. Thanks in advance.
Besides I ain't French and I ain't surrendering. :tooth:
They will not fire until the trigger is fully pulled to the rear........ no slight.
Actually safer than my Kahr. It has zero safeties.....
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
You may be on to something. Seems like in the old days people who became LEOs were gun people. They loved firearms and used them on and off the job. They could talk about them knowledgeably and with enthusiasm. Nowadays a lot of LEOs seem to view their sidearm as just a tool. I don't know.
As far as the folks on this forum not having Glock discharge issues, I think it just proves we have a smarter class of people on this forum.
My point, exactly. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a cop, on the "COPS" tv show, fiddle with a gun, trying to clear it. A common gun that any one of us would have cleared, field stripped, and cleaned in half the time.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270
Replies
You really don't understand the whole 'unsubstantiated claim' thing, do you? :silly: :tooth:
George Carlin
Exactly! He needs to stop bringing facts into the thread. That's not what this is all about! How are we supposed to argue when you present facts!!
Easy, call him a liberal! Nobody will listen to him then! Hah, take that Eli!
George Carlin
Why? Because I gots lots of them. They were "gifts"........so to speak. And they've worked well for me since they first came out........and were subsequently "gifted".
I own Glocks, which are apparently unsafe as well. So, I am obviously not to be taken seriously. I carry unsafe guns in unsafe holsters. I'm a veritable time bomb of catastrophe! Stand clear!!!!!!
:fan:
Talk to horse or Sam....they can help you out on that front.
In the words of my (at the time, 3 year old) nephew......Yo momma's a blowfish!
OK, that was a zinger. Well done!
Take it back, or I'll call you a Libtard! No, a FLAMING libtard!!!
George Carlin
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/247176/cominolli-manual-safety-kit-all-glocks-except-36
Safety system offers a manual safety lever while retaining all 3 internal Glock safeties. Parts are chrome-plated stainless steel with a black matte finish. Frame modification and gunsmith installation will be required.
Technical Information
Notes:
Ergonomically designed and located
Positive engagement and disengagement
With manual safety engaged, all three Glock passive safeties are locked in place
Pistol can be loaded and unloaded with manual safety engaged, thus diminishing the chance of an unintentional discharge
Long-wearing Stainless Steel, hard chrome plated parts with matte black tactical finish
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
They are and using the supposition because of their vast numbers in use you already have that answer. Obviously, so many are being used (65% of US Law Enforcement) it would make sense about a 2/3 majority of an unknown amount of AD/ND would be with a Glock.
I don't disagree with that assumption. However I do think/believe/have a gut feeling that Glocks require special handling procedures/extra precautions other makes of semi-autos do not.
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Wait a minute, almost all the threads on this forum are not supported by "Facts' just what members experience and see, their likes and dislikes and personal perceptions. Since when does anything posted on the forum on any topic have to proven with statistics.
I was honest and admitted I don't have any solid data/facts/numbers beyond what I read and see on this and other forums. Therefore I'm totally wrong when I say Glocks are more prone to AD/NDs than other makes of pistols?
I wanted others members honest opinions on Glocks because I do see a lot of AD/ND reported in the news and it so happens the majority are with Glocks. I wanna know why and get input from others on here how they feel about Glocks.
I fired a compact Glock 9mm last weekend and the owner told me he carries it with an unloaded chamber because he doesn't feel comfortable carrying it "Loaded" and will sacrifice the time he will need to rack the slide if he needs to use it. He has been around guns a long time and I don't take his opinion lightly. It was his personal choice, not mine or anything I said to him.
I still say special precautions are needed with Glocks and for whatever reason folks seem to forget common good sense gun handling safety precautions with them. They work as advertised and there would be no AD/NDs if they followed safety steps 100%, but they don't and I want to know why. What is it about a Glock they seem to get a brain fart about they ordinarily wouldn't with other makes?
Is it because they are internally "Cocked" and they can't see it? Is it because they somehow lend themselves to being fired when a foreign object is caught in the trigger guard and the trigger is tugged/pulled slightly rearward, when they load or unload one or when they un-holster or re-holster one?
I do think I'm on to something here.
I'll be sure to post any pertinent data I can find (when and if it is ever available) on here that supports my theory or disproves it entirely.
In the meantime I appreciate all the input from all of you and am looking forward to hear from those who haven't expressed their opinions/experiences yet. Thanks in advance.
Besides I ain't French and I ain't surrendering. :tooth:
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
I'm not trying to convert anyone, but I would like to see some common sense in this argument. I went to Glock Armorer's school, have taken down Glocks to pre-assembly condition, and can assure you they won't go off until someone pulls the trigger.
Gene here I quote myself from my FIRST post in this thread:
"Those who own Glocks on here don't seem to have or had any issues with them. I know carrying one does take some understanding of how they function and what not to do because they can and will go BANG when a round is chambered and the TRIGGER is PULLED as advertised."
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
I think maybe like Army Jeeps I used to drive you had to be careful and fully understand how they operate. They would flip over because the center of gravity if you yanked the steering to hard for a sharp turn, but were capable of of going on forever if knew how too properly drive one. I did for years with no problems, but saw many rolled over when the operator got careless.
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
This has been said elsewhere - possibly even in this thread - I'm too strung out right now from dealing with a power outage to check. . .
Glock has something like 70% of the law enforcement market in the U.S., and they have a pretty substantial chunk of the the LE and military market worldwide. This equates to some millions of individuals who were issued a Glock, and potentially did zero research on their own to learn about the weapon. Everything they got on the gun was provided by their service. A percentage of those individuals will have no personal interest in the gun - it is simply part of their issued equipment. This level of apathy can be anywhere from "Well, it's a PITA, but I'd probably better learn THIS stuff because people really CAN get hurt here" to "Well, I guess I'd better learn this stuff or I'll get written up" to "Let them write me up. I'm a public employee with affirmative action immunity. It'll take more than that to make me lose my job and bennies"
To make this a fair discussion we've got to look at the following:
Number of N.D.s from pistols that are agency-issued equipment. The guy carrying a personal HK in a Glock agency, or for that matter, a personal Glock in an HK agency needs to be looked at separately, as they are most likely NOT in the ranks of the apathetic **** who probably shouldn't be packing in the first place.
Number of N.D.s per number of guns in the field - there is the possibility that there are more of them with Glocks simply because there are more Glocks out there. If 70% of the guns out there are Glocks, they need to be having more than 70% of the N.D.'s for this argument to be valid.
Look for a correlation between number of N.D.s, type of ISSUED weapon, and amount of training provided.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
The only lawsuit I'm aware of is in CA when a cop was paralyzed. He left his Glock in the backseat of a car and his 3 years son picked it up and shot him with it. He is now trying to blame Glock for his irresponsibility of leaving a loaded firearm in a child reach. No brainier to me he should lose the case. I found it on Police One or some similar sounding site.
Here I found it:
http://www.policeone.com/legal/articles/5884833-Judge-allows-paralyzed-cop-to-sue-Glock/
UPI
"LOS ANGELES — A California appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit against gun maker Glock Inc. by a police officer paralyzed after his 3-year-old son accidentally shot him.
A Los Angeles judge dismissed a suit brought two years ago by Enrique Chavez, who claimed his service pistol, a Glock 21 handgun, had a light trigger pull and lacked a grip safety, an attached device that requires deactivation before firing.
The judge said the Los Angeles Police Department had reviewed the gun's design, including the force required to pull the trigger, and concluded its advantages outweighed any risks, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Wednesday.
The California Second Court of Appeal said Tuesday a jury could conclude a grip safety strong enough to withstand a 3 year-old's grasp "would minimize the risk of accidental discharge without undermining performance," and in a 3-0 ruling, allowed the case to continue."
The comments (below the article) on that site are good and blame the cop, not the Glock.
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
As I say, different design philosophies. You regard a simple gun like a Glock as equivalent to running with scissors and that's fine. I regard using the more complex guns as trying to drive while simultaneously texting, eating breakfast, drinking coffee, and, in the case of Buffy and Zorba, putting on makeup. A lot of the **** I mentioned in my first post go into total vapor lock when you give them multiple controls. Face it - some people just can't drive a stick shift.
Ponder for a moment the traditional DA/SA autoloader - Sigs, pre-M&P Smith's, Beretta M9's, most HK USP variants. Yes, they have a heavy first trigger pull and a decocker or safety that gets you back to that point. The critical difference I see between these guns and the Glock is that you have to REMEMBER to engage those devices before you put the gun away in a cocked and unlocked condition. With the Glock, all you have to do is LET GO OF THE GUN.
More features, not always better.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
The safety on a Glock. It's either on...........or it's off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfwN0X8YnWo
" Baby, do you understand me now?
Sometimes I feel a little mad.
But don't you know that no one alive can always be an angel?
When things go wrong, I seem to be bad.
(group unison) But I'm just a soul whose intentions are good:
(just Burdon) Oh Lord! Please don't let me be misunderstood"
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Ohhhh, I've gots me some insights. Some came at the sacrifice of some pre-conceived notions that needed to date the heartless beeyotch of reality.
I basically provide three types of handgun training at work; anything from introductory to ongoing on Glocks for the rank and file, introduction to 1911's for SWAT newbies (who are typically pretty locked on with the gun stuff), and helpful pointers to those who decide to carry something other than the issued Glock (who are also typically pretty locked on with the gun stuff).
Thrown in with all of that, I get to run shotgun and rifle training, service weapons, order ammo, keep records, etc... Short version, there is an awful lot of the job and only a few of us trainer types to do it. My nightmare scenario would be a switch back to a DA/SA system with all those gadgets that Horselips is enamored of. There would be little change in my workload with regards to teaching the top 10-15%% - the warriors who are enthusiastically motivated to learn their equipment - but the amount of time and effort that would be required to develop and maintain safety and proficiency for the rest would be staggering. Then we get into the additional cost of ammo this would require. The taxpayers wouldn't like it, and my hair is in a race to be either all gray or all gone as it is.
One example I occasionally throw out is to equate all firearms with rattlesnakes. Just like guns, rattlesnakes are useful things to have around for keeping vermin in check. I personally have no problem being in the vicinity of a rattlesnake, BUT I AM DAMNED ATTENTIVE TO THE FACT THAT THE RATTLESNAKE IS THERE. People "get bit" when they forget they are dealing with a rattlesnake, and it makes little difference what species of rattler (or brand of gun) it is.
"Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
Sort of like the AR-15, or the "sniper" bolt actions, Glocks are the fat, ugly chicks of the shooting world. Useful, but not necessarily something you brag to your friends about.
:vomit:
Jerry
Come on guys - that's a LOW blow! :tooth:
And every gun toting Joe Shmoe, too, according to "civilian" Glock sales too. They just stand still and shoot at paper with cartoon zombies on them all day with poor habits and no formal training...not even once a year. Gimme a break...
Glocks are designed for simplicity of function to reduce the action necessary to make the gun ready for business. It's your own damn fault if you don't train with it appropriately!
They will not fire until the trigger is fully pulled to the rear........ no slight.
Actually safer than my Kahr. It has zero safeties.....
My point, exactly. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen a cop, on the "COPS" tv show, fiddle with a gun, trying to clear it. A common gun that any one of us would have cleared, field stripped, and cleaned in half the time.
I will fear no evil: For I carry a .308 and not a .270